201916042019839831543A9A6A15-BE2A-522F-87FB-97D0FFDD5FB4264962274AC93DB-2594-4052-954A-6D78D9DD5F6C2201201911032019This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC0 Public Domain Dedication.Abstract

Elateridae, commonly known as click-beetles, is a large beetle family containing approximately 10,000 described species worldwide (Costa et al. 2010). Although they are well-known and usually easy-to-recognise as a family, even for non-specialists, the limits of, as well as phylogenetic interrelationships within, Elateridae are still in flux (e.g., Lawrence and Newton 1995; Costa et al. 2010; Douglas 2011; Kundrata and Bocak 2011; Kundrata et al. 2016, 2018a; Douglas et al. 2018; Bocak et al. 2018). Various suprageneric classifications have been proposed for the family, and also generic limits often considerably vary between different authors (e.g., Fleutiaux 1947a; Hayek 1973; Gurjeva 1974a, b; Dolin 1975; Stibick 1979; Calder 1996; Sánchez-Ruiz 1996; Cate et al. 2007; Costa et al. 2010; Kundrata et al. 2018a). Although recent catalogues are available for some world regions (e.g., Golbach 1994, Calder 1996, Cate et al. 2007, Arias-Bohart and Elgueta 2012, Zapata and Sánchez-Ruiz 2012, Bousquet et al. 2013, Aguirre-Tapiero and Johnson 2014, Johnson and Chaboo 2015, Platia and Ghahari 2016, Girard 2017, Tarnawski et al. 2018) or for certain suprageneric groups (e.g., Schimmel 1999, 2003, 2004, 2005; Tarnawski 1996, 2001; Schimmel et al. 2015, 2016; Schimmel and Tarnawski 2009, 2010, 2012; Douglas 2017; Kubaczkova and Kundrata 2017; Kundrata et al. 2018b, c), a comprehensive catalogue of the world Elateridae fauna is not available. Therefore, many recent studies on Elateridae still follow works by Candèze (1857, 1859, 1860, 1863, 1891), Schwarz (1906a, 1907), and Schenkling (1925, 1927). Those authors, however, did not include data on the type species and type fixation in their catalogues. The study of diversity, taxonomy, phylogeny, and biogeography of Elateridae is not possible without genus-group name concepts which are consistent with regulations from the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN 1999). The first attempt to cover all genus-group names in Elateridae was by Hyslop (1921), followed by additions to that catalogue by Arnett (1955). However, despite their great effort, these authors introduced some nomenclatural inconsistencies, and new supraspecific names in Elateridae have been proposed since that time. Therefore, it is necessary to update the information on genus-group names for Elateridae, and correct these errors still commonly repeated by contemporary authors.

By compiling this catalogue, we work to provide a summary of all genus-group names including synonymies, misspellings, and their availability in the sense of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN 1999). We also indicate the type species for all genera including information on their designations, give the systematic position of each genus according to the most recent studies, and provide a robust framework for future Elateridae workers. This catalogue could serve as a starting point for future Elateridae-related studies, not only focused on systematics but also on diversity, evolution, biogeography, and nature conservation.

Materials and methods

We compiled all genus-group names in the Elateridae subfamilies Agrypninae, Campyloxeninae, Hemiopinae, Lissominae, Oestodinae, Parablacinae, Physodactylinae, Pityobiinae, and Tetralobinae. Genus-group names in Elaterinae, Thylacosterninae, Morostomatinae, Plastocerinae, Negastriinae, Cardiophorinae and Dendrometrinae sensu lato (including e.g., Hypnoidini, Oxynopterini, Semiotini, Dimini and Senodoniini) will be treated in the next parts of the catalogue. The family classification follows the Handbook of Zoology (Costa et al. 2010), with additional changes proposed by Bouchard et al. (2011; family-group names), Kundrata and Bocak (2011, several classification changes based on the molecular phylogeny), Schimmel and Tarnawski (2012, description of the tribe Tetrigusina), Kundrata et al. (2016, description of the subfamily Parablacinae), and Kundrata et al. (2018a, subfamilial rank proposed for Tetralobinae). A synopsis of this suprageneric classification of extant Elateridae is given in Table 2 in Kundrata et al. (2018a).

The names of the family-, genus- and species-group taxa are given with the name of the author, and the year and page of publication. The page given is the page where the taxon name and description are printed, except for the generic names first introduced in catalogues and made available by including one or more available species names (ICZN 1999, Art. 12.2.5). When a work was published in various parts we determined the oldest part in which a particular name became available for the first time, following the Principle of Priority (ICZN 1999, Art. 23.1). A search for each genus-group name was performed in the hundreds of publications dealing with Elateridae and its relatives, including all works cited here but also numerous other taxonomic revisions, regional faunistic studies, and checklists, general entomological books, etc. Additionally, we checked the online version of the Nomenclator Zoologicus (http://www.ubio.org/NomenclatorZoologicus/) to look for potentially important information on authorship, dates of publication and homonyms. The year and page given for the incorrect subsequent spellings are the first year and page in which they are used. Incorrect subsequent spellings not in prevailing usage are unavailable (ICZN 1999, Art. 33.3). Complete data and comments for family- and genus-group names are presented with the lowest-rank name (e.g., tribe rather than subfamily, subgenus not genus), since these criteria follow the Principle of Coordination (ICZN 1999, Art. 36.1 and 43.1). The detailed information for family-group names is given in Bouchard et al. (2011) and is not repeated here. We provide the type species for each genus-group name, including information on its designation (i.e., original designation, monotypy, and in the case of subsequent designation we provide author, year and page). New type species designations are proposed as needed to preserve taxonomic stability (ICZN 1999, Art. 69). We do not repeat type species and their fixations for replacement names as “both the prior nominal taxon and its replacement have the same type species, and type fixation for either applies also to the other, despite any statement to the contrary” (ICZN 1999, Art. 67.8). Under each family- and genus-group name, the currently valid name is listed the first, followed by synonyms in chronological order. Misspellings, unavailable names, and corrected stem formations are followed by colon “:”. Dates of publications and exact bibliographic references (especially problematic ones, often not cited uniformly by researchers) are taken from the following comprehensive general works: Evenhuis (1997), Cate et al. (2007), Bouchard et al. (2011), Bousquet and Bouchard (2013, 2017), Nagel and Schmidlin (2014), and Bousquet (2016).

CatalogueFamily Elateridae Leach, 1815

Elaterides Leach, 1815: 85. Type genus: Elater Linnaeus, 1758. As pointed out by several authors, e.g., Lawrence and Newton (1995) and Bouchard et al. (2011), the oldest name for this family is Cebrionidae Latreille, 1802. In 2011, a formal application to maintain usage of Elateridae over Cebrionidae was submitted by PJ Johnson for publication in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature, and for an eventual vote by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN). A notice for the reception of this new Case was published in December 2011 (ICZN 2011). The ICZN later closed this Case without further comments (ICZN 2012). Based on reviews by three ICZN Commissioners it had been decided that the Case is covered by Article 35.5 of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN 1999), and that no further actions were needed (ICZN Secretariat, personal communication). The same reasoning supports conserving usage of Elateroidea Leach, 1815 over Cebrionoidea Latreille, 1802.

Adelocera Latreille, 1829: 451. Gender: feminine. Type species: The widely accepted type species for this genus is Elaterovalis Germar, 1823: 49, by subsequent designation (Hyslop 1921: 623). However the valid type species is Elaterfuscus Fabricius, 1801: 228 (non Schrank, 1781, nec Geoffroy, 1785), by subsequent designation (Duponchel 1840: 119). Since Elaterfuscus Fabricius, 1801 is currently placed in the genus Agrypnus Eschscholtz, 1829, an application asking the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature to set aside the earlier type species designation by Duponchel is necessary to conserve Adelocera Latreille, 1829 as the valid name of this genus.

Lucarius Gistel, 1848b: ix. Gender: masculine. Replacement name for Iphis Laporte, 1838. Gistel (1848b: xi) also proposed Lucarius as a replacement name for Ocypus Leach, 1819 (Staphylinidae) in the same work. We act as First Revisers (ICZN 1999, Art. 24.2) and give precedence to Lucarius Gistel, 1848a: xi in Staphylinidae and therefore Lucarius Gistel, 1848b: ix in Elateridae is treated as a junior homonym.

Lycoreus Candèze, 1857: 206. Gender: masculine. Replacement name for Iphis Laporte, 1838. This genus has been treated as valid with Lycoreusregalis Candèze, 1857: 209 as its type species by subsequent designation by Hyslop (1921: 654). Candèze (1857: 200, 207) however clearly stated that Lycoreus was proposed as a replacement name for the preoccupied name Iphis Laporte, 1838 and therefore Lycoreus has the same type species.

Abiphis Fleutiaux, 1926: 92. Gender: feminine. Replacement name for Iphis Laporte, 1838. This genus has been treated as valid with Elaternobilis Illiger, 1800: 116 as its type species by original designation. Fleutiaux (1926: 92), however, clearly stated that Abiphis was proposed as a replacement name for the preoccupied name Iphis Laporte, 1838 and therefore Abiphis has the same type species.

Type species: Elaternobilis Illiger, 1800: 116, herein designated. Gender: feminine. Genus Abiphis Fleutiaux, 1926 has been treated as valid with Elaternobilis Illiger, 1800 as its type species by original designation. However, Fleutiaux (1926: 92) clearly stated that Abiphis was proposed as a replacement name for the preoccupied name Iphis Laporte, 1838 and therefore Abiphis has the same type species. Because the name Abiphis is a synonym of genus Lycoreus Candèze, 1857 (= replacement name for Iphis Laporte, 1838), we establish here a new genus based on Elaternobilis Illiger, 1800, which was used as type species for Abiphis. See Casari (2008: 165–166, couplet 12 of her key) for diagnostic character states (ICZN 1999, Art. 13.1.2). All species hitherto classified under Abiphis Fleutiaux, 1926 (see Casari-Chen 1994: 191) are here transferred to Neoabiphis Kundrata & Bouchard, gen. n., and the following new combinations are proposed: N.candezei (Alluaud, 1896), comb. n., N.fairmairei (Fleutiaux, 1903), comb. n., N.goudoti (Fleutiaux, 1942), comb. n., N.insignis (Klug, 1833), comb. n., N.nobilis (Illiger, 1800), comb. n., and N.viettei (Girard, 1966), comb. n.

Tetrigusina Schimmel & Tarnawski, 2012: 116. Type genus: Tetrigus Candèze, 1857. The correct stem based on genus Tetrigus is Tetrig-, however Schimmel and Tarnawski (2012) used the whole genus name as stem (as required by ICZN 1999, Art. 29.6) in order to avoid homonymy with Tetrigidae Rambur, 1838: 64, previously established in the order Orthoptera.

Phosphorus: Voet 1806: Tab. 43, fig. 17 [unavailable name, work not consistently binominal (ICZN 1999, Art. 11.4)]. We follow other authors (e.g., Alonso-Zarazaga and Lyal 1999: 8) in considering the names in Voet’s publication not consistently binominal. The genus-group name Phosphorus has not been made available in Elateridae to our knowledge.

Sharon Arias-Bohart & Elgueta, 2015: 2. Gender: feminine (erroneously treated as masculine in original description; the correct name of the type species is Sharonamoena). Type species: Asaphesamoenus Philippi, 1861: 743, by original designation.

Calocerus LeConte, 1853: 428. Gender: masculine. Type species: Pityobiusanguinus LeConte, 1853: 428, by monotypy. First proposed as a synonym of Pityobius LeConte, 1853. The name Calocerus LeConte, 1853 is available because it was treated as a senior homonym [of Calocerus Fauvel, 1891: 88; Coleoptera: Staphylinidae] before 1961 by Blackwelder (1952: 90) (ICZN 1999, Art. 11.6.1). First Reviser (ICZN 1999, Art. 24.2) found (Pityobius LeConte, 1853 vs. Calocerus LeConte, 1853) is Arnett (1962: 505). However, the specific name niger published by LeConte, 1853 is not available as it has never been used as valid or considered a homonym. The originally included species in Calocerus LeConte is that species listed by LeConte as valid, i.e., Pityobiusanguinus LeConte, 1853 (see ICZN 1999, Article 67.12).

Cladocerus: Harold 1869: 1509 [unavailable name, first proposed as a synonym and not made available subsequently (ICZN 1999, Art. 11.6)]. If found to be available then preoccupied by Cladocerus Rafinesque, 1819: 429 [Coelenterata].

The gender of this genus has been contentious in the past. Under the provisions of Art. 30 of the Code (ICZN 1999), and because of the lack of any etymology from Laporte (1838), it may correspond to the Greek word Λάκων (a Laconian or Spartan man), transliterated without changes as Lacon following the Art. 30.1.2. In the Greek dictionaries, this word is masculine, so the genus is masculine too, as well as all the genera having – lacon as their last component.

Latinised form of the Greek noun τριήρης (a trireme, in allusion to the dilated tarsi of its type species). According to the provisions of the ICZN (1999, Art. 30.1.2), if the noun is feminine, the genus is also feminine. The specific name ramitarsus can be considered a noun in apposition.

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Simone Policena Rosa (Itajubá, Brazil) for her comments on Physodactylinae, and Karine Savard (AAFC, Canada) for help with finding literature. This study was supported by the internal grant of the Faculty of Science, UP Olomouc, Czech Republic (IGA_PrF_2019_024; RK, MK), the Moscow State University research project No. АААА-А16-116021660095-7 (AP), and the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) Brasil, research grant 304620/2014-9/PQ-Sr (CC).